The Medical Thread

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

If it can't be proven that vaccines play a role in the increase of autism, can someone explain why the rates of autism continue to rise? Do you think genetic factors play a role? I honestly don't believe that genetic influences alone can account for such an astronomical rise in a disorder's prevalence over a matter of just a few years. Could environmental factors be a potential explanation? AKA_Monet mentioned something about environmental factors in an earlier post. We were discussing a different topic, but could this also fall under environmental factors?

I do not think in an of itself, the actual "piece" or construct DNA that is truly the "vaccinating part" has ANYTHING to do with autism. But there IS precedence that an "outside" piece of the construct could cause a severely lethal allergic reaction. It has to do with the one of the first gene therapy using the Adenoviral construct to cure Cystic Fibrosis by Dr. James Wilson. He risked ALOT to do this therapy that goes against UN human clinical trials. And the 15 year old boy he did the gene therapy in died a horrid death. Fortunately, the boy's father was a lawyer...

Autism's symptoms has been shown to be EXACERBATED by environment. As far as what is causing it, it could be too much lead or other minute items that we regularly do now and consume -- hayle, it could be that we have too much tech chit abound that fries our brains and gets transmitted to a developing fetus... Who knows?

[AKA_Monet]

Cheerful-

Are you asking all these questions because you saw the Charlie Bartlett trailer?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Cheerful-

Are you asking all these questions because you saw the Charlie Bartlett trailer?

lol lol lol lol

No, I just wanna read other opinions. I do wanna see that movie though. Does anyone know when it starts?

I just want to mention one more thing. Back to the DSM manual....o.k. I promise I won't bring up the the DSM anymore...lol.

I just wanted to mention something about the vaccines. There may be an overlooked alternative explanantion for this epidemic. Over time the the criteria for a diagnosis of autism have loosened, resulting in the labeling of substantially more mildly afflicted individuals as autistic. The 1980 version of the DSM required individuals to meet six of six criteria for an autism diagnosis, In contrast to that, the 1994 version, which is the version we're currently using requires individuals to meet any 8 of 16 criteria. The 1980 version contained only two diagnosis relevant to autism, DSM IV contains five including Asperger's syndrome which most researchers regard as a high functioning variant of autism.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

lol lol lol lol

No, I just wanna read other opinions. I do wanna see that movie though. Does anyone know when it starts?

I just want to mention one more thing. Back to the DSM manual....o.k. I promise I won't bring up the the DSM anymore...lol.

I just wanted to mention something about the vaccines. There may be an overlooked alternative explanantion for this epidemic. Over time the the criteria for a diagnosis of autism have loosened, resulting in the labeling of substantially more mildly afflicted individuals as autistic. The 1980 version of the DSM required individuals to meet six of six criteria for an autism diagnosis, In contrast to that, the 1994 version, which is the version we're currently using requires individuals to meet any 8 of 16 criteria. The 1980 version contained only two diagnosis relevant to autism, DSM IV contains five including Asperger's syndrome which most researchers regard as a high functioning variant of autism.

The genetics of autism just came out... I posted it somewhere in the News and Views thread.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

The genetics of autism just came out... I posted it somewhere in the News and Views thread.

Thanks, I'll find it.

[AKA_Monet]

Back to mental illness treated by medication:

Do you the "mentally ill treated with meds" should have restricted freedoms in the US due to the "possibility" being a detriment to themselves or others?

What would/would not be the medical relevancy for that?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Back to mental illness treated by medication:

Do you the "mentally ill treated with meds" should have restricted freedoms in the US due to the "possibility" being a detriment to themselves or others?

What would/would not be the medical relevancy for that?

This is a really good question. I guess I would have to say yes. I was talking about something similar to this in another thread regarding athletes. Well, it wasn't that similar, but is was related to testosterone and how it effects human behavior.

When doctors prescribe medication to mentally ill patients, there are some restrictions that the patient is put under by the doctor, to keep them from endangering themselves or others, rather it be driving a car, cooking, ect ect. Personally, I think mentally ill patients should be forced into treatment even if they're not an imminent threat to themselves or others. The government estimates that there are about 2 million people in the United States who have been forced into mental institutions, and under federal law are banned from owning any kind of firearm.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

hayle, it could be that we have too much tech chit abound that fries our brains and gets transmitted to a developing fetus... Who knows?

lol lol